MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2072889811 · doi:10.3109/00207450108986507

Suppression of Analgesia in Rats Induced by Morphine or L-Name but not Both Drugs by Microtesla, Frequency-Modulated Magnetic Fields

2001· article· en· W2072889811 on OpenAlexaff
Scott J. Dixon, Michael A. Persinger

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Neuroscience · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicPhotoreceptor and optogenetics research
Canadian institutionsLaurentian University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMorphineNociceptionChemistryNitric oxideAnalgesicNitric oxide synthaseSalineAnesthesiaPharmacologyMedicineReceptorBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In Experiment I, the nociceptive threshold for a criterion response to thermal stimuli (hot plate) for rats was obtained following injections with one of various dosages of either morphine or the nitric oxide synthase inhibitor, L-NAME. On the bases of these results, rats in Experiment II were injected with either morphine (4 mg/kg), L-NAME (50 mg/kg), both morphine and L-NAME, or saline after baseline measurements for nociception and then exposed to either a 1 microTesla magnetic field or to a sham field for 30 min. The magnetic field, presented once every 4 sec, was a frequency-modulated pattern whose pixel durations, for each of the 837 successive values, were 1 msec. Nociceptive thresholds were measured immediately after the exposure and 30 min later. The results indicated that exposure to this magnetic field abolished the analgesic effects of morphine or L-NAME when injected separately but not when injected together relative to rats that had received these drugs and had been exposed to the sham field.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.561

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.041
GPT teacher head0.333
Teacher spread0.292 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations17
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of NeuroscienceSame topicPhotoreceptor and optogenetics researchFrench-language works237,207